The following link is to a post on Ed Silverman's Pharmalot blog. It details results of a Quintiles survey of 144 pharma and biopharma executives, 129 managed care executives and more than 1000 patients regarding their opinions defining the value of a drug.
I found it interesting that there was such a large discrepancy between the percentage of patients that highly rated the importance of safety and efficacy (75% and 73%) versus the pharma exec views of the importance of same two parameters (38% and 44%). Maybe patients are better at reading the newspapers regarding pharmaceutical safety and efficacy issues that are very prominent at present (see J&J, Genzyme, etc). Astounding really given the environment.
I also found it to be a bit of a head scratcher that only 38% of pharma execs felt that China was a threat to emerge as a major center of innovation - in contrast to 47% of managed care executives - the folks making the purchasing decisions! It is a bit scary if we are taking China lightly on the innovation front. Yes, we're currently outsourcing manufacturing, clinical research, and clinical trial work - but I don't think we can expect all the new discovery work to remain in the West.
Finally, I was a bit floored that 88% of the pharma execs felt they had to collaborate better with competitors but only 44% were willing to share information on failed compounds. It seems old habits are hard to break. I think it is clear that companies need to collaborate more -- in open innovation models - in order to improve the development success rate in the industry as well as to accelerate the development process. I hope some of these execs come to their senses and look at more collaborative models -- like the recent one announced relative to Alzheimer's disease, or GSK's malaria project.
Posted by Bruce Lehr June 16th 2010.